Alan Pardew

[Beren]

I think he wanted him from Norwich, but seems to be this thing that he only didn't sign him that summer because we didn't get the Ferguson money in time and so he went to Coventry. Fact still remains though that that summer we chose Cort ahead of Bellamy.

 

Correct. It's in SBR's autobiography.

[TRC]

Wonder what would have happened had we got Zenden and Jeffers instead of Robert and Bellamy. I'm quite sure they were our original targets?

[TRon]

It took even Bobby the best part of two seasons before we looked a decent team. His first season was a rescue job and the second was about as meh a season as you can get.

 

That's why I raised the point, in fairness to Pardew he's still building. But Bobby really believed in certain types of players like Dyer, Bellamy, Robert and the like. He definitely didn't give a s*** about having big target men up front, in fact he broke up a relatively successful duo in Ferguson and Shearer quite ruthlessly to pursue his own philosophy by bringing Bellamy into the team. Whether Pardew has that sort of vision is where the jury is still out for me.

 

You regard Ba and Cisse as target men?

 

I don't, but clearly Pardew does if you look at how the ball arrives at them.

[TRon]

I think he wanted him from Norwich, but seems to be this thing that he only didn't sign him that summer because we didn't get the Ferguson money in time and so he went to Coventry. Fact still remains though that that summer we chose Cort ahead of Bellamy.

 

Not how I remember it. I was dubious about Bellamy at the time as I didn't think he was a finisher so was quite impressed that Bobby pushed that one through at £6m. He really did want him badly and his judgement proved right in the end.

[Tooj]

Even if I can agree with this to some extent it wouldn´t have been a great idé at Tottenham. He hadn´t the player and should have been playing deeper in the defence.

 

Of course its all conjecture, but I think playing HBA instead of Obertan gainst Spurs would have at least kept their defenders on their toes. With Obertan, their fullback was overlapping and we were under wave and wave of attacks.

 

FWIW, I reckon that if Ben Arfa had started against Spurs, he would have made some sort of difference. A difference from an attacking perspective anyway, I'm sure Hatem would have given BAE a rough time down the right wing and guess that would have meant more chances for us.

 

But, not sure if Ben Arfa's presence would have changed the overall outcome. We still would have lost imo as Spurs were simply too good - they exploited our weaknesses in CM (Guthrie/Perch were overwhelmed) and defence well. Whilst it could have been a different scoreline, it still would have been a Spurs win. Bringing Ben Arfa for Obertan in the first half wouldn't have made much difference either, the game was lost as soon as the second goal went in.

 

In all honesty, I'm kinda glad he didn't play Ben Arfa, as he'd have had little or no impact, and I think it would have been another excuse for Pardew to come out with something in the press about Ben Arfa needing to work hard to fit into the team ethos.

[Guest]

I know he always wanted him as he was after him twice. But in the summer of 2000 we had the choice of Cort or Bellamy even before Ferguson was sold, and we opted for Cort.

[Parky]

Even if I can agree with this to some extent it wouldn´t have been a great idé at Tottenham. He hadn´t the player and should have been playing deeper in the defence.

 

Of course its all conjecture, but I think playing HBA instead of Obertan gainst Spurs would have at least kept their defenders on their toes. With Obertan, their fullback was overlapping and we were under wave and wave of attacks.

 

FWIW, I reckon that if Ben Arfa had started against Spurs, he would have made some sort of difference. A difference from an attacking perspective anyway, I'm sure Hatem would have given BAE a rough time down the right wing and guess that would have meant more chances for us.

 

But, not sure if Ben Arfa's presence would have changed the overall outcome. We still would have lost imo as Spurs were simply too good - they exploited our weaknesses in CM (Guthrie/Perch were overwhelmed) and defence well. Whilst it could have been a different scoreline, it still would have been a Spurs win. Bringing Ben Arfa for Obertan in the first half wouldn't have made much difference either, the game was lost as soon as the second goal went in.

 

In all honesty, I'm kinda glad he didn't play Ben Arfa, as he'd have had little or no impact, and I think it would have been another excuse for Pardew to come out with something in the press about Ben Arfa needing to work hard to fit into the team ethos.

 

My thoughts are the same.

[Zero]

Wonder what would have happened had we got Zenden and Jeffers instead of Robert and Bellamy. I'm quite sure they were our original targets?

 

Yea, this.  We opted for Bellamy after Jeffers turned us down.

 

Jeffers was hardly a Bellamy-type player imo

[TRon]

I know he always wanted him as he was after him twice. But in the summer of 2000 we had the choice of Cort or Bellamy even before Ferguson was sold, and we opted for Cort.

 

Seems to me you are picking the worst periods of SBR at the beginning and at the end to make a point. I'm not surprised really as when you are dictated by stats that's what you are limited to.

[Guest]

Just making a point that you said Bobby wouldn't have went for two big strikers, when he did, that's all.

[NG32]

He played three at one point.

 

Ferguson Sheaer and Cort.

[Nordstrom]

Just having a good read of the beginning of this thread.

 

Couldn't have proven us any more wrong.

[Cronky]

An interesting statistic is that we are 5th from bottom of the league in terms of chances created, but 4th from top in terms of the conversion rate of those chances.

 

It sometimes feels to me like Pardew has pared down the art of winning games to the bare bones, and this no-frills method is what's carrying us through. It's not pretty to watch but tbh results are more important than performances.

 

I do have faith that we're a work in progress and we'll move forward from this point though.

[Dave]

The argument about the inclusion of Ben Arfa aside, I don't think we play particularly bad football. IMO it's a continuation of how we played under Hughton in general; sometimes we knock it about and look really good, sometimes we play the percentage game. The same as most Premier League clubs to be frank. Both approaches have got us results this season, and as long as that continues in the main then it's hard to criticise.

 

I can understand the concerns of those who think that moving towards a percentage game too often will see us moving backwards though. If we see this season out well and make Europe then I think Pardew will have more confidence in his own plans whatever they may be. Things are on something of a knife edge at the moment because we're doing better than seemingly anyone at the club expected, so he's scared to change anything too much in case he misses this opportunity.

[NG32]

WHat dave says.

[Shak]

Aye Dave, think we should also start playing some better stuff now that we have Cisse.

 

We haven't really had a striker who's a threat to get in behind the defense, Cisse gives us that. That should force teams to play a bit deeper and give us more space to play in. He also seems very much willing to work the channels and his movement seems quality, something the likes of Shola and Best didn't really give us.

 

Pardew has said he wants to move towards a more pass and move based game, we haven't really seen it consistently so far but he's only been here just over a year. We were built to be a long ball team when he took over tbh, you can't change that overnight. Adding players like Cabaye, Ba and Cisse seems to signal that we want to play it on the deck more, so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt in terms of his long term plans.

[Parky]

An interesting statistic is that we are 5th from bottom of the league in terms of chances created, but 4th from top in terms of the conversion rate of those chances.

 

It sometimes feels to me like Pardew has pared down the art of winning games to the bare bones, and this no-frills method is what's carrying us through. It's not pretty to watch but tbh results are more important than performances.

 

I do have faith that we're a work in progress and we'll move forward from this point though.

 

Ba.

[Dr Venkman]

Pardew's said himself that he didn't expect Ba to be as good as he has been. We started off the season by concentrating on being difficult to break down and managed to get a few results. Once Ba started scoring there's been no reason to change the strategy as it's kept us in the top 7 all season.

[TRon]

The argument about the inclusion of Ben Arfa aside, I don't think we play particularly bad football. IMO it's a continuation of how we played under Hughton in general; sometimes we knock it about and look really good, sometimes we play the percentage game. The same as most Premier League clubs to be frank. Both approaches have got us results this season, and as long as that continues in the main then it's hard to criticise.

 

I can understand the concerns of those who think that moving towards a percentage game too often will see us moving backwards though. If we see this season out well and make Europe then I think Pardew will have more confidence in his own plans whatever they may be. Things are on something of a knife edge at the moment because we're doing better than seemingly anyone at the club expected, so he's scared to change anything too much in case he misses this opportunity.

 

The type of football we play varies widely depending on the players starting on any particular day. We don't seem to play any particular brand of football consistently other than the very basic sort that Cronky mentions. Maybe it is just a case of getting the best out of a lop sided squad at the moment and we will build on it next season as we add players in key positions like left back - absolutely essential if we want to play the sort of football which Spurs have progressed to.

[Dr Venkman]

Thing is though, with the purse strings being held so tightly and players brought in as much for their contract situations and low prices are we really gonna be in a position to choose the type of football we play? We could set out to play good football next season and the exact same thing could happen, I don't blame Pardew one bit btw, he's pretty much rubbing everyone's noses in it this season considering how well he's doing.

[Lush Vlad]

The argument about the inclusion of Ben Arfa aside, I don't think we play particularly bad football. IMO it's a continuation of how we played under Hughton in general; sometimes we knock it about and look really good, sometimes we play the percentage game. The same as most Premier League clubs to be frank. Both approaches have got us results this season, and as long as that continues in the main then it's hard to criticise.

 

I can understand the concerns of those who think that moving towards a percentage game too often will see us moving backwards though. If we see this season out well and make Europe then I think Pardew will have more confidence in his own plans whatever they may be. Things are on something of a knife edge at the moment because we're doing better than seemingly anyone at the club expected, so he's scared to change anything too much in case he misses this opportunity.

 

This.

[ATB]

For me "good football" is just as much about entertaining the fans as minimaxing the oporunites for the oppoinent. If you can control the ball you will stop the other team to create chances and we dont have to sit through games like Wolves (a), Blackburn (a) and Villa (h) etc.

[Beren]

The argument about the inclusion of Ben Arfa aside, I don't think we play particularly bad football. IMO it's a continuation of how we played under Hughton in general; sometimes we knock it about and look really good, sometimes we play the percentage game. The same as most Premier League clubs to be frank. Both approaches have got us results this season, and as long as that continues in the main then it's hard to criticise.

 

I can understand the concerns of those who think that moving towards a percentage game too often will see us moving backwards though. If we see this season out well and make Europe then I think Pardew will have more confidence in his own plans whatever they may be. Things are on something of a knife edge at the moment because we're doing better than seemingly anyone at the club expected, so he's scared to change anything too much in case he misses this opportunity.

 

I think the bolded bit above is why people are challenging our direction – which, as fans on a forum, we’re entitled to do. [Not aimed at you, but the “we’re sixth, therefore your discussion/logic is invalid” contingent]. Pardew has demonstrated a pattern of not addressing growing issues until things begin to falter – and sometimes not even then, and I am personally not entirely confident he’ll try to change after what will (barring some end-of-season collapse) be a highly successful season in terms of results.

 

I also don’t think we play the same football as under Hughton, but it’s not a million miles off. In fits and starts we’ve had moments of midfield ingenuity, but for the most part we have to thank God for Ba Ba for goals – feeding off scraps and long balls. Pardew’s purchases certainly seem to indicate he wants our football to be prettier, which is great – Santon is a fine example of that. His current defensive frailties aside for one moment, his technique and ambition to come forward is excellent and Pardew (I hope) recognises the importance of full-backs in the modern game. They are the options, when available, that stops centrebacks and goalkeepers from launching it from the back, transitioning defence to attack with more measure. They are the marauding, over-lapping havoc that can tip the scales against a team content to defend (see Micah Richards this season). Pardew’s purchases (or lack thereof) in strengthening us on both defensive flanks this summer will be a good indicator of how he wants us to play [ – and possibly Ashley’s parsimony too, I suppose].

 

My main concern isn’t the purchases though – which have been excellent on the whole (Cabaye, Ben Arfa, Santon, Ba, Cisse – all point to sexy football). It’s more his ability to coach, train and deploy them effectively. Hughton had us playing some pretty slick football at times with the likes of Barton, Nolan, Tiote and Carroll – it was some good passing stuff. Most of the goals came from elsewhere, yes, but in terms of our foothold in games – I felt much better about their passing and ball retention than I have under the majority of Pardew’s tenure so far – and yet, the results under Pardew are better so far. Cronky’s statistic about ‘chances’ is telling for me though. By the end of the season, I’d love to have more confidence in Pardew’s ability to coach the team to control possession and to develop/integrate players who could become team linchpins (HBA, Santon, Cisse). I don’t expect it to happen overnight and it won’t be a linear progression, but it’d be nice to see signs of progress.

 

[Hughesy]

Can't agree that we had a better foothold in matches under Hughton than Pardew.  Must have been watching very very different matches.

[Dave]

I don't think there's much in it tbh. We certainly don't play dramatically better football under Pardew IMO, not that I mean it's worse though. I believe some have taken the oft-quoted comments from Cabaye about how Pardew apparently convinced him to sign as proof that we play a slicker game these days. That might have been the intention and might still be, but there's not a ton of evidence so far in my eyes.